The Second Term of Gerald Ford

[Bo]

Great TL. It truly appears that you put a lot of time and effort into this. Keep up the good work.

The only error that I found is this:

The Republicans picked up a whopping six senate seats in the midterm elections, making the total 42 Republicans and 68 Democrats. They also managed to pick up thirty house seats, almost all of them pro-war Republicans.

The Senate has 100 seats total, so I'm assuming you mean there are 42 Republicans and 58 Democrats.

[Bo]

Great TL. It truly appears that you put a lot of time and effort into this. Keep up the good work.

The only error that I found is this:

The Republicans picked up a whopping six senate seats in the midterm elections, making the total 42 Republicans and 68 Democrats. They also managed to pick up thirty house seats, almost all of them pro-war Republicans.

The Senate has 100 seats total, so I'm assuming you mean there are 42 Republicans and 58 Democrats.

Haha, sorry about that. typing error. I'll have a primary update today or tomorrow.

I'm really looking forward to the update.

[Bo]

I hope Scoop Jackson gets reelected.

[Bo]

I hope Jackson wins in the House. I'm glad to see a hawkish Democratic President after Vietnam and I don't want to see all the hawks removed from the Democratic Party as in RL.

[Bo]

I hope Jackson wins in the House. I'm glad to see a hawkish Democratic President after Vietnam and I don't want to see all the hawks removed from the Democratic Party as in RL.

By "RL" you mean your imagination, right?

No, RL=Real Life.

[Bo]

I hope Jackson wins in the House. I'm glad to see a hawkish Democratic President after Vietnam and I don't want to see all the hawks removed from the Democratic Party as in RL.

By "RL" you mean your imagination, right?

No, RL=Real Life.

Is that an MMORPG or something? Cause here in the real world, the Democrats have been dominated by hawks for decades.

You call the Democrats hawks? Oh, please. The Democrats opposed American entry into the Gulf War when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, planned to invade Saudi Arabia and possibly other countries, and threatened American interests. If Democrats are hawks, then Hell froze over.

[Bo]

I hope Jackson wins in the House. I'm glad to see a hawkish Democratic President after Vietnam and I don't want to see all the hawks removed from the Democratic Party as in RL.

By "RL" you mean your imagination, right?

No, RL=Real Life.

Is that an MMORPG or something? Cause here in the real world, the Democrats have been dominated by hawks for decades.

You call the Democrats hawks? Oh, please. The Democrats opposed American entry into the Gulf War when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, planned to invade Saudi Arabia and possibly other countries, and threatened American interests. If Democrats are hawks, then Hell froze over.

Yes, I call the Democrats what they are, which is a party of warmongers. The Democrats have never united to oppose war, and certainly not in the past few decades.

And it was a Democratic-controlled Congress that approved Bush I's Gulf War.

Yes, but that was because nearly all Republicans but only about one-fifth of Democrats in Congress voted in favor of the Gulf War. That 1/5 of the Democratic Party allowed the Gulf War resolution to narrowly pass while about 4/5 of the Democrats in Congress voted against this resolution. If there's two things I'm really angry with about the Democratic Party, it's that nearly all hawks and social conservatives (especially pro-lifers) got kicked out of the party in the 1960s and 1970s. That's why I consider myself a Democratic-leaning independent. I agree with the Democrats very strongly on economic policy, but strongly disagree with them on social issues and foreign policy.

[Bo]

I hope Jackson wins in the House. I'm glad to see a hawkish Democratic President after Vietnam and I don't want to see all the hawks removed from the Democratic Party as in RL.

By "RL" you mean your imagination, right?

No, RL=Real Life.

Is that an MMORPG or something? Cause here in the real world, the Democrats have been dominated by hawks for decades.

You call the Democrats hawks? Oh, please. The Democrats opposed American entry into the Gulf War when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, planned to invade Saudi Arabia and possibly other countries, and threatened American interests. If Democrats are hawks, then Hell froze over.

Yes, I call the Democrats what they are, which is a party of warmongers. The Democrats have never united to oppose war, and certainly not in the past few decades.

And it was a Democratic-controlled Congress that approved Bush I's Gulf War.

Yes, but that was because nearly all Republicans but only about one-fifth of Democrats in Congress voted in favor of the Gulf War. That 1/5 of the Democratic Party allowed the Gulf War resolution to narrowly pass while about 4/5 of the Democrats in Congress voted against this resolution. If there's two things I'm really angry with about the Democratic Party, it's that nearly all hawks and social conservatives (especially pro-lifers) got kicked out of the party in the 1960s and 1970s. That's why I consider myself a Democratic-leaning independent. I agree with the Democrats very strongly on economic policy, but strongly disagree with them on social issues and foreign policy.

Being anti-war is part of being pro-life.

I'm all in favor of peace. However, sometimes war and other military operations (ex. bombings) are necessary to accomplish a particular goal or to protect a country's interests. In fact, the U.S. bombed the former Yugoslavia twice in the 1990s in order to stop and prevent gencoide, which also causes many innocent human lives to end.

[Bo]

I hope Jackson wins in the House. I'm glad to see a hawkish Democratic President after Vietnam and I don't want to see all the hawks removed from the Democratic Party as in RL.

By "RL" you mean your imagination, right?

No, RL=Real Life.

Is that an MMORPG or something? Cause here in the real world, the Democrats have been dominated by hawks for decades.

You call the Democrats hawks? Oh, please. The Democrats opposed American entry into the Gulf War when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, planned to invade Saudi Arabia and possibly other countries, and threatened American interests. If Democrats are hawks, then Hell froze over.

Yes, I call the Democrats what they are, which is a party of warmongers. The Democrats have never united to oppose war, and certainly not in the past few decades.

And it was a Democratic-controlled Congress that approved Bush I's Gulf War.

Yes, but that was because nearly all Republicans but only about one-fifth of Democrats in Congress voted in favor of the Gulf War. That 1/5 of the Democratic Party allowed the Gulf War resolution to narrowly pass while about 4/5 of the Democrats in Congress voted against this resolution. If there's two things I'm really angry with about the Democratic Party, it's that nearly all hawks and social conservatives (especially pro-lifers) got kicked out of the party in the 1960s and 1970s. That's why I consider myself a Democratic-leaning independent. I agree with the Democrats very strongly on economic policy, but strongly disagree with them on social issues and foreign policy.

Being anti-war is part of being pro-life.

I'm all in favor of peace. However, sometimes war and other military operations (ex. bombings) are necessary to accomplish a particular goal or to protect a country's interests. In fact, the U.S. bombed the former Yugoslavia twice in the 1990s in order to stop and prevent gencoide, which also causes many innocent human lives to end.

Clinton was a war criminal, yes.

So you're saying you're okay with at least hundreds of thousands of innocent people being brtually murdered for their ehtncicity and/or religion? Part of being pro-life means preventing genocide. Libertas, are you pro-life?

[Bo]

I hope Jackson wins in the House. I'm glad to see a hawkish Democratic President after Vietnam and I don't want to see all the hawks removed from the Democratic Party as in RL.

By "RL" you mean your imagination, right?

No, RL=Real Life.

Is that an MMORPG or something? Cause here in the real world, the Democrats have been dominated by hawks for decades.

You call the Democrats hawks? Oh, please. The Democrats opposed American entry into the Gulf War when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, planned to invade Saudi Arabia and possibly other countries, and threatened American interests. If Democrats are hawks, then Hell froze over.

Yes, I call the Democrats what they are, which is a party of warmongers. The Democrats have never united to oppose war, and certainly not in the past few decades.

And it was a Democratic-controlled Congress that approved Bush I's Gulf War.

Yes, but that was because nearly all Republicans but only about one-fifth of Democrats in Congress voted in favor of the Gulf War. That 1/5 of the Democratic Party allowed the Gulf War resolution to narrowly pass while about 4/5 of the Democrats in Congress voted against this resolution. If there's two things I'm really angry with about the Democratic Party, it's that nearly all hawks and social conservatives (especially pro-lifers) got kicked out of the party in the 1960s and 1970s. That's why I consider myself a Democratic-leaning independent. I agree with the Democrats very strongly on economic policy, but strongly disagree with them on social issues and foreign policy.

Being anti-war is part of being pro-life.

I'm all in favor of peace. However, sometimes war and other military operations (ex. bombings) are necessary to accomplish a particular goal or to protect a country's interests. In fact, the U.S. bombed the former Yugoslavia twice in the 1990s in order to stop and prevent gencoide, which also causes many innocent human lives to end.

Clinton was a war criminal, yes.

So you're saying you're okay with at least hundreds of thousands of innocent people being brtually murdered for their ehtncicity and/or religion?

No, that's why I oppose Clinton's slaughter in southeast Europe.

He didn't slaughter anyone. He saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in Bosnia and Kosovo. Get your facts straight.

[Bo]

I hope Jackson wins in the House. I'm glad to see a hawkish Democratic President after Vietnam and I don't want to see all the hawks removed from the Democratic Party as in RL.

By "RL" you mean your imagination, right?

No, RL=Real Life.

Is that an MMORPG or something? Cause here in the real world, the Democrats have been dominated by hawks for decades.

You call the Democrats hawks? Oh, please. The Democrats opposed American entry into the Gulf War when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, planned to invade Saudi Arabia and possibly other countries, and threatened American interests. If Democrats are hawks, then Hell froze over.

Yes, I call the Democrats what they are, which is a party of warmongers. The Democrats have never united to oppose war, and certainly not in the past few decades.

And it was a Democratic-controlled Congress that approved Bush I's Gulf War.

Yes, but that was because nearly all Republicans but only about one-fifth of Democrats in Congress voted in favor of the Gulf War. That 1/5 of the Democratic Party allowed the Gulf War resolution to narrowly pass while about 4/5 of the Democrats in Congress voted against this resolution. If there's two things I'm really angry with about the Democratic Party, is that nearly all hawks and social conservatives (especially pro-lifers) go kicked out of the party in the 1960s and 1970s. That's why I consider myself a Democratic-leaning independent. I agree with the Democrats very strongly on economic policy, but strongly disagree with them on social issues and foreign policy.

are you a Bob Casey Democrat?

I guess I would be classified like that. I recently took the Political Matrix Test and I got about +3 on social issues but about -7 on economic issues. I'm also very hawkish on military/defense matters. I would have supported all the wars and military operations that the U.S. did since it was created except the Vietnam and Iraq Wars, which I consider to have been unnecessary. Was Bob Casey hawkish on military/defense matters, though? Did he support the Gulf War (of 1990-1991)?

[Bo]

I don't know which is more disappointing, Jackson dying, or Howard Baker running for President.

[Bo]

Attorney General: Winfield Dunn

Great choice!

Thanks man, didn't know you were a reader. Enjoying the TL?

I enjoy too

[Bo]

Great TL so far.

[Bo]

Good TL so far. Go Howard Baker!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BTW, how is the situation in the Middle East?

[Bo]

Good timeline

[Bo]

Great timeline!

[Bo]

Awesome an Alternate Clinton Presidency, if he's reelected in 2000(Which I suspect he will be) that his heart issues may get the better of him ITTL and that Slick Willie may be the next President to befall the Twenty-Year Curse...

Are his heart problems really that bad? BTW, when was the last recession in this TL? I lost track.

[Bo]

I will be posting an update tomorrow.

I'm looking forward to it. BTW, I think your PV in 1996 is off, since 51.2%+49.3%=100.5%, which is impossible. You probably meant 50.2% for Clinton/Cuomo.

[Bo]

I will be posting an update tomorrow.

I'm looking forward to it. BTW, I think your PV in 1996 is off, since 51.2%+49.3%=100.5%, which is impossible. You probably meant 50.2% for Clinton/Cuomo.

Thanks man. My computer's calculator must've not been doing me justice when I did that. You've been pretty good at correcting my mathematical mistakes, and I appreciate it.

You're wlecome. Anytime. I'm glad I'm able to help in any way I can.

[Bo]

I think Clinton would have waited until his second term in order to have the affair.

[Bo]

Is the Internet around in 2000 in this TL?

[Bo]

Good so far.